On Thursday, September 01, 2016 03:17:50 pm Julien ÉLIE wrote:
> There's still something I find confusing: on the one hand, SSL is badly
> broken and "diediedied", it is a proprietary protocol name, and the
> consensus in the TLS WG seems to be "long live TLS" but on the other
> hand major
Hi,
The technology is SSL, and is sometimes also refered to as
SSL/TLS.
please no. the technology is TLS.
+
i would like to continue to be able to say unambiguously that all
known versions of SSL are badly broken and should be avoided. Let's
not muddy those waters further.
+
Let's not use
On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 12:44:02 pm Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> i would like to continue to be able to say unambiguously that all known
> versions of SSL are badly broken and should be avoided. Let's not muddy
> those waters further.
+1
___
TLS
t;d...@fifthhorseman.net>; Julien ÉLIE
<jul...@trigofacile.com>; tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Terminology clarification around SSL & TLS
> i would like to continue to be able to say unambiguously that all
> known versions of SSL are badly broken and should be avoided. Let's
> not m
> i would like to continue to be able to say unambiguously that all known
> versions of SSL are badly broken and should be avoided. Let's not muddy
> those waters further.
+1
--
Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies
IM: richs...@jabber.at Twitter: RichSalz
On Wed 2016-08-31 03:35:38 -0400, Julien ÉLIE wrote:
> Following a recent discussion about how to name the successor of TLS
> 1.2, I wish to share an idea about a possible terminology clarification.
> I believe it could help to conciliate people understanding of SSL & TLS.
>
> We would have 3
Hi all,
Following a recent discussion about how to name the successor of TLS
1.2, I wish to share an idea about a possible terminology clarification.
I believe it could help to conciliate people understanding of SSL & TLS.
We would have 3 notions:
1/ the technology,
2/ the protocols,
3/ the
